Author Topic: 109g10 (Read 2194 times)

Viking · « **Reply #30 on:** December 02, 2007, 11:55:27 AM »

I know it is there, that was not my question.

Denniss · « **Reply #31 on:** December 02, 2007, 12:12:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by BlauK
Actually that special tail wheel is quite visible in the pic above

I know it's there but it does not belong to Rüststand 1 but to the experimental 500 kg bomb installation.

BlauK · « **Reply #32 on:** December 02, 2007, 12:13:38 PM »

I believe the ETC-500 bomb rack could take a 500kg bomb in other planes, but in 109G series the 500kg bomb would just not have enough space under the plane. Maybe that causes the contradiction?

In K-series there was a higher tail wheel (almost normal one) in the rear in some models.

Viking · « **Reply #33 on:** December 02, 2007, 12:17:43 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Denniss
Rüststand

You are the only one I've ever seen using that word. What is your source? I see your a wikipedian ... and only your articles use this word in context with the 109.

TUXC · « **Reply #34 on:** December 02, 2007, 12:20:02 PM »

Does anyone have any test data on the g-10? I've seen many for g-6s and g-14s and a few for k-4s, but never seen any speed or climb charts for a g-10.

A lot of good data on late war 109s can be found at these sites:

http://kurfurst.allaboutwarfare.com/#Gustav
http://kurfurst.allaboutwarfare.com/#Kurfurst

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me109/me109g.html
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me109/me109-gj-fx.jpg
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14v109g-level.jpg

As stated before, look at the data and not the conclusions since both of these guys tend to make some interesting ones.

Also take a look at http://109lair.hobbyvista.com for info, pictures, and drawings.

Denniss · « **Reply #35 on:** December 02, 2007, 12:40:01 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Viking
You are the only one I've ever seen using that word. What is your source? I see your a wikipedian ... and only your articles use this word in context with the 109.

Lots of people that are digging into the Bf 109 stuff use both Rüststand and Rüstsatz. Rüstsatz is just the add-on kit like additional guns or bombs. Rüststand is a more or less deep conversion to fulfil a specific mission task. Thus we have the R1 long-range fighter-bomber, the R2-R5 reconnaisssance aircraft (long/short range, different cameras and/or radio equipment) and the R6 all-weather capable aircraft. That's what the /Rx designation stands for (also stamped onto the aircraft dataplate).

Adding a Rüstsatz does not change the aircraft designation, a G-6/R6 will always be an all-weather capable G-6, the G-6 with wing gondolas is just a G-6 with atached R6 (in some Mtt docs also referred as Rüstsatz VI, probably to avoid confusion with Rüststand 6).

Viking · « **Reply #36 on:** December 02, 2007, 01:19:14 PM »

But is the Rüststand a field conversion or a factory conversion like the various Umrüst-Bausätze?

gripen · « **Reply #37 on:** December 02, 2007, 02:21:37 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Denniss
And, as I said before, the G-10 was a production aircraft and not old repaired/refurbished G-series airframes with a new engine.

Artie Bob's listings gives 2048 built as "Neubau" while Mermet gives total 4500 of which 3500 were recycled G-6s. Difficult to say if the the term recycled mean repaired or unused airframes converted to G-10. Nothing concrete can be said based on Valtonen either. I can only quess that there were actually three kind of G-10 airframes:

1. Repaired airframes
2. Converted new built airframes
3. Originally built as G-10 airframes

But that is only speculation based on evidence.

Quote

Originally posted by Denniss
The often mentioned G-2/R1 with a 500 kg bomb was in reality a prototype based on the G-2/R1 modified with that special tail wheel to achieve more ground clearance.

IIRC this was in Luftfahrt International, anyway, one of proto. Viking apparently likes the idea a lot.

Regarding the appearance of the AS; two protypes flew late 1943 and the earliest pictures in units I 've seen are from March or April 1944. With MW50 I have no exact date, earliest pictures I'm aware are early summer 1944 (May-June).

MiloMorai · « **Reply #38 on:** December 02, 2007, 04:33:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by gripen
Regarding the appearance of the AS; two protypes flew late 1943 and the earliest pictures in units I 've seen are from March or April 1944. With MW50 I have no exact date, earliest pictures I'm aware are early summer 1944 (May-June).

This ties in nicely with the first loss of a G-6/AS, being May 8 1944 when Fw Karemiyz of 8./JG 1 in WNr 20629 was killed in combat with P-47s. This was a converted G-6.

Don't take anything that Kurfurst says at face value.

Viking · « **Reply #39 on:** December 02, 2007, 04:52:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MiloMorai
Don't take anything that Kurfurst says at face value.

Of course not. Nor do I take anything you or Gripen says at face value, and I assume the feeling is mutual.

MiloMorai · « **Reply #40 on:** December 02, 2007, 05:14:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Viking
Of course not. Nor do I take anything you or Gripen says at face value, and I assume the feeling is mutual.

Glad you don't but your good buddy has a well know reputation for manipulation, fabrication, half truths and mis-interpretation of facts.

This is in contrast to you Viking, as well as gripen, myself and the ones on his hate list who don't do it deliberately.

Keiler · « **Reply #41 on:** December 03, 2007, 01:27:00 AM »

"Rüststand" is the condition of the plane according to the Rüstsatz it carries, not the kit itself.

Example:

A 109 with "Rüstsatz XY" has the "Rüststand XY".
In english directly:
A 109 with "Ordnance/Equipment kit XY" has the "Ordnance/Equipment condition XY"

Hope that clears it up!

Regards,
Matt

Denniss · « **Reply #42 on:** December 03, 2007, 05:28:27 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Keiler
"Rüststand" is the condition of the plane according to the Rüstsatz it carries, not the kit itself.

Example:

A 109 with "Rüstsatz XY" has the "Rüststand XY".
In english directly:
A 109 with "Ordnance/Equipment kit XY" has the "Ordnance/Equipment condition XY"

Hope that clears it up!

Regards,
Matt

Nope, you are mixing Rüstzustand with Rüststand. Rüstzustand = setup condition (translation may not 100% correct but it should fit)

http://www.beim-zeugmeister.de/zeugmeister/index.php?id=50

Keiler · « **Reply #43 on:** December 03, 2007, 06:32:44 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Denniss
Nope, you are mixing Rüstzustand with Rüststand. Rüstzustand = setup condition (translation may not 100% correct but it should fit)

http://www.beim-zeugmeister.de/zeugmeister/index.php?id=50

GOSH, german engineers and their terminology. I know what I am talking about, since I am one of this ilk...

Thanks!

Matt

croduh · « **Reply #44 on:** December 03, 2007, 10:39:28 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Raptor
Croduh don't design a terrain around a specific plane. Leave field/plane assignments to the CMs in the events

I'm not designing the terrain around one plane, just would like to know what plane could be used as a replacement if the map gets approved.
Was hoping to embed some skins too, if h2h would ever come back...